Kadhaye Illa Machaan!!

Whenever I ask for feedback about a film from my friends, and if I sense that the film did not meet their expectations, I used to be like Kamal in Vasool Raja,

'Nee enna solla pora nu therium, kadhaye illa nu sollapora'.

Our audience apparently consider story to be the garbagriha of a movie and would consider their pilgrimage a waste of time if the garbagriha is closed or invisible. So let me ponder on the following questions. First, does the story have to be essentially the garbagriha of a movie? Second, if we consider the presence of a story so indispensable to a movie, from where does our 'story obsession' come from?

To answer the first question, as far as I know, the story may or may not be the garbagriha of a movie. And the discretion rests solely on the film maker. Story, in other words, can merely serve as an excuse to make a movie. The most passionate of filmmakers make movies not only because they need money to upgrade their car from a Swift to a City, or to move their kids to an international school from a local matriculation, but also to realise the pleasures or pains of filmmaking. Film makers when they double up as writers have more to undergo, which essentially is the case with Tamil cinema. In many ways, film making might be an 'arippu' like how Ajith calls his ‘duty’ in Yennai Arindhal. So here comes the question, why should we audiences, reserving nearly three hours of our precious time and almost a day's salary for a movie do so only to satisfy the itch of an overweening filmmaker?

I can't answer the question quite convincingly but I will make an attempt. The best movies we have seen, at least most of them, have been done by only those filmmakers who have had that itch, managed to satisfy it time and again over the years and yet preserved it from getting healed altogether. Let us take the case of Mani Ratnam's Alaipayuthey. It was a typical 'boy meets girl' story, they make and break and make again. Why did we, especially our middle class conservative women fall for the charm of the film? Was it because Shakti, so typical of our middle class womenfolk, met an Uber cool Madhavan, fell in love and gathered guts to cheat her family only to elope with him and face more worthy trouble? Was it some kind of a weird wish-fulfilment? Certainly not. Look at the scene where Karthik’s (Madhavan) family meet Shakti's for the first time.

Karthik’s father says, 'Naan peria panakaran thaan. Aana yen pillaya ezhai maari thaan valathirken'. 

Shakti's father retorts, 'Naan middle class thaan. Aana yen ponna naan maharani maari thaan valathirken'.

This is how you write characters. A rich fellow takes pride in being outwardly simple due to guilt.  Whereas ask our fathers, who would have got us our first PC in the third year of our college after at least two years of pestering, how they grew us up. They would say we were born and brought up like princes.

The point I am trying to make is, Alaipayuthey, in terms of 'story' is very fragile and easily dismissible. But why did we make a 'hit' out of it? Look at the scene where Karthik tries to pacify an angry Shakti. It doesn't happen in a tranquil place like where Simbu and Trisha meet in VTV. It happens in a heavily crowded railway station like Mambalam. So many people keep crossing the over-bridge where the hero pleads with a reluctant heroine who wants to break altogether with him. It is a matter of life and death. A virtual battle. He fights that out amid hordes of people who, steeped in their own pursuits of survival, cannot keep off from interrupting his desperate endeavours  to win his life back. If anything, you and me would have gone through the most decisive phases of our lives only in places like these. You would have attended a telephonic interview for a high paying job inside an MTC bus where the driver couldn't have helped honking exactly when you were trying to retrieve an answer for a crucial question from among the thick layers of your confused memory.

An ordinary love story, with characters so resembling us, with episodes staged in places where we relate to, obviously with some good music and acting becomes an instant classic among us. So what really, is the role of the 'story'?

Now let me shift to people who still hate Alaipayuthey, not because they hate love stories, but because I still have not proved that it has a 'story'. There are people whom I know who would marry their daughters to men without brains but won't watch movies which don't have a story. Specimens like them help me to examine the unanswered questions I have posed  in the beginning of my essay. Why do we have a 'story obsession'?

Nobody in India, can deny the fact that the first story they came across in their childhood was either from Mahabharata or Ramayana or from other Hindu myths. Indians, just like we are obsessed with music, are in some ways obsessed with story as well. We like getting to know stories, admire and emulate the best characters inside them and love drawing comparisons of our real life narrative with that of the story. But why are Ramayana and Mahabharata alone so popular among us whereas Kalidasa's Meghdoot or Harshacharita are not so? Given our rich heritage of classic literature, why do we know only very few stories?

The reason is that the epics of Mahabharata and Ramayana do not depend upon written texts. Nobody can establish with evidence that the current version of Mahabharata that we all know is the one that was written by Vyasa, centuries ago. The stories of our great epics are mostly hearsay (Sevivazhi kadhaigal). Romila Thapar asserts strongly that the original texts of the Vedas and the grand epics of India since they are almost old by a millennium, would not have survived to this day. Every mythological tale would have been modified either by hearsay or by the whim of the rulers who dominated India's history at various points of time. So my point is, stories that are hearsay alone have the potential to travel across time and distance and survive for eternity. In other words, we Indians, like stories only if we can listen to them or see them. Our hunger for stories does not match our hunger for reading. If we feel like getting to know a story we always choose the easiest mode of imbibing it - either through someone narrating it or acting it out. This brings us to the point where we naturally expect movies, the biggest art form of our generation, to tell long stories for us or perish altogether if they cannot. We people want to learn a story as easily and painlessly as possible, either through a movie or a play, and impress others with our narration of it. A man who knows a lot of stories, true or ridiculous they may sound, easily becomes the most sought-after man in a group. This phenomenon explains easily our tendency to spoil a film for our friends by revealing the most important twists in the story before they had had the chance of watching it. The viewer/listener, by becoming a narrator, tries to claim credit equal to that of an author.

Vote for 'Us'

'Politics is like that. Everyone is corrupt. You cannot change anything here. This was how it was right from the beginning of time. There will be someone in the electoral rolls who would, in the process of building his fortune through politics, hand something out to me and I would have to vote for him. See Jeeva, come to terms with reality. Nobody is clean. You can't stay without voting. Be practical like us. When five thirsty people are fighting for a single glass of water, you cannot expect them to queue up and take turns. The world is so bad and you may have to slug it out with them even if you don't like fighting'.

This pretty much sums up the mind of the educated middle class voter whom I personally know, under different faces and personas. Some of those I have seen were fuming at the Election Commission which, at some places was denying people the ‘privilege’ of getting paid for votes. A friend of mine, who badly wanted money for his vote was the one who had told me secretly a few months ago, that he whipped his son for copying in his exams. People think money for vote, sometimes could be your birthright.

Some of those who share the aforementioned views about election and politics, must be reminded about a few facts. To those people who assume, that the world has always been bad and rulers have been selfish and as time progresses, we are fast nearing the end of the world which would resemble something like the dystopian environs of Mad Max, let me tell you that you are grossly mistaken. Yes. You are mistaken.

A few thousand years ago. Men were slaves. They could not marry the women of their choice. Even if they did, the bride had to spend her first night with their master. The word ‘salary’ did not make any sense. They had no land. They worked, they slept, they worked, they slept and slept once and for all when they crossed their 30s. They had children who continued where their fathers left. The cycle was endless, or so the ruling classes thought. Government? The landowners and merchants decided their ruler based on whom they trusted to protect their interests. The government guaranteed the right of the master to take the life out of a slave at his whim.

In the next few centuries, men became serfs. A serf was nothing but a slave with a land. He could marry a woman of his choice but was not permitted to leave his land. The appalling working conditions persisted. Women were not allowed outside their kitchens. They could not inherit the land of their fathers or husbands. But man was free, at least on some aspects of personal freedom. He could cook and eat something that he wished, lest he could afford it. There too, a guy like you and me could not choose his governor.

In the next few centuries, men became workers. They could marry women and have children, make them study and try to give them a better future. They worked again like they did during the days of slavery and serfdom close to fifteen hours a day. Even children were not spared from work which the government did not mind. Women were allowed to work. They still had lesser rights than men who were at least allowed to vote.

In the last two centuries, men have remained workers but with 'rights'. The law says he cannot be employed for more than eight hours a day. It guarantees a minimum wage subject to revision based on rising costs of living, a provident fund and pension on some occasions. Women can inherit property, divorce husbands if they want to. Above all, they too for the first time, are allowed to vote. Children, at least on paper, are not allowed to work.

So this is how we have evolved to this day. Okay let me put a question across. How did a slave, who did not even have a right to live, never mind eat or vote, graduate into becoming a worker, who could form associations, collectively bargain, achieve a pay hike, sue his employer if he was fired illegally, bring a country to a standstill by choosing to strike and above all, vote out a powerful government if it did not work for him?

How did he attain so many rights? Did some Messiah like Narendra Modi jump from heavens and liberate the hapless masses from their suffering whenever it went beyond tolerance? Do you people think so?

Every change for the better came from nobody else, but the 'people'. The masses. The collective consciousness. Every individual felt the need for a change in his bones. Every change came, not from people who believed in the immutability of their destiny, not from people who rented their wives to their masters for a night so as to ensure existence, not from people who betrayed their fellow men for an extra slice of bread, not from people who assumed that world was bad and cruel from time immemorial, not from people who thought they were 'practical' and hence wiser than those who think otherwise, not from people who oozed defeatism from every pore of their body believing in some 'fatalist' theory that their religion introduced them to.

You can trust me if I tell you that every right so far attained has been through the 'collective action' of the masses against an overpowering establishment strongly backed by elites and populated by oligarchs. People shed blood, wives lost their husbands, mothers lost their sons and daughters and children their parents. If those martyrs, who sacrificed themselves so that their children would lead better lives come to know of the fact that we people are actually demanding money to cast a vote, I would leave it to you to imagine their reactions.

The most appalling of the facts that I came across recently was that, it was only the educated middle classes who cannot wait for their leaders to pay them for their votes.

'Voter Apathy'

I am not demanding that all our working classes must immediately come to the streets and get ready to shed their blood to achieve a political revolution like how our naxalites fantasize. I admit that our frustration towards the system has not reached such a boiling point.

All I expect from us is a free and honest expression of what we feel about our political establishment. If you are one among those aforementioned voters who are completely disillusioned with the system, you may consider choosing NOTA or you may choose to stay at home. If a considerable size of the electorate decides to boycott voting, it would certainly be viewed with some serious attention and not ignored as 'voter apathy' by the establishment.

You know what 'voter apathy' really constitutes? Refusal to follow politics as much as we follow cricket or cinema; refusal to learn about the history of our main political parties, the stands they took on various issues at various points of time; refusal to care about the consequences your vote may bring upon on others by relying solely on the personal 'benefit' your vote may reap for you. Can our middle classes deny the fact that a sizable portion of them, in spite of their knowing Modi's involvement in Gujarat riots 2002, vote for him because he might raise the income tax slab to 5 lakhs? Aren't we still ready to vote for DMK or ADMK in our constituency if one of their candidates ensure good roads in our vicinity, totally ignoring their dubious record of governance all these years?

Please bear in mind that the overwhelming vote that Modi won on three occasions in Gujarat assembly elections, cast by our Hindus in consolidation, regardless of what consequences it might bring upon their fraternal Muslims, ensured that Muslims remained and remain as second class citizens in Mahatma Gandhi's state. It is difficult to rent or purchase a property if you are a Muslim in Gujarat and Muslim children are treated like Dalits in their schools. On the eve of the 2014 elections, I was advising my friends against voting for Modi on account of Gujarat’s poor record on Child Malnutrition and farm suicides. One of my friends (he was a Hindu), who as usual turned a deaf ear to me, told me that he would vote for Modi because he wanted a Uniform Civil Code so that Muslims would no longer enjoy undue privileges. I am sure that people like him voted Modi to power and I leave it to them to decide on how much blame they would take as farm suicides have increased by 26 percent over the last two years. Can these people deny the fact that among those 26 percent, a majority of them would be Hindus and can a Uniform Civil Code be of any use now?

Subordinating the interests of other communities to that of one's own and choosing a representative based on that is the biggest act of betrayal an individual can perpetrate upon his fellowmen. I personally know a friend of mine who keeps voting for a party because its leader belongs to her caste. If Indians did not vote like that, we would not be having caste or religion based parties throughout India.

So here is my humble request. All these years right from our births, we have never really been allowed to express or choose our personal preferences. We studied engineering because the markets wanted us to. We married women whom we never knew or understood because our parents wanted us to. We pay lakhs to private schools to educate our children because our neighbors want us to. We fornicate on the very first night of staying with our unknown partner, because our planets wanted us to. 

At least now, for once, let us express ourselves with the utmost honesty on an issue that is a zillion times bigger than those in which we never were given a chance to choose. Your political representative has no way of knowing that you chose him for lack of an alternative. Every vote you cast for him, would obviously be construed as a tacit approval for his corrupt practices and as a strong reaffirmation of faith in a system which you people are totally fed up with. The voting machine does not have options to display colors of varying intensity based on how much you trust your representative. It is only binary, win or lose.

Please remember that we were not the first generation to turn 'practical' by inventing the method of choosing the 'least hated one' among the contestants and let us not fool ourselves into believing that such a ‘wise’ approach might change our society for the better. Right from Independence, our grandfathers and fathers have been voting this way successfully ensuring that every ruler of the present belongs to a 'better and improved class of criminals' than the preceding ones. And this is why we are waiting for people of the past like Kamaraj or Gandhi or Shastri to rescue the country from the ever growing destruction we have brought upon ourselves.

Makkal Nala Kootani and Alternative Politics

On Mar 26, when DMDK announced its decision to ally itself with the People's Welfare Front of 4 parties, irrespective of the kind of responses it elicited from its opponents and sympathizers, something did strike me. There was a third force in the reckoning, for the first time in TN politics which exuded so much confidence that we cynics, were forced to think twice before discounting its potential.

Alternative Politics, not alternative party:

I have, from all my limited political knowledge and observation, managed to sketch a concrete, though substantially inchoate, vision of what I perceive to be the kind of Alternative Politics that we people are rooting for. Alternative Politics, in the first place, if anything, should have a vision, for the future. The vision naturally gives a direction and aids in picking the right ideas towards achieving the end. Under any circumstance, the vision should not be subjected to compromise, leading to a change in its fundamentals. The ideas and direction might be altered according to the needs and changing circumstances. At the centre of evolving ideas towards the end, the ability to place current social phenomena in its historical context assumes paramountcy.

For instance, Koodankulam issue where thousands of people have come out to the streets protesting against the operation of the completed nuclear reactor should be seen as part of the international denuclearization movement whose voices are worth listening to. The international movement seeks to suggest cheaper, eco-friendly, alternative renewable sources of energy along with the ways to realise the end. The vested interests of private nuclear companies who would not assume  responsibility in case of any nuclear  accident, are being targeted by these movements. The removal of liability laws, which were supposed to come into effect in case of accidents, led to faulty design of the reactor by Areva in Fukushima(Japan) ultimately killing thousands of people leading to a mammoth taxpayer effort for the uphill restoration task. In India, as part of Indo-US nuclear deal, we are supposed to buy cheap nuclear fuel, bring delicensed international companies(including Areva) to design reactors for us, generate nuclear power at more than Rs.10 per unit and acquit these companies immediately, in case of any nuclear accident however huge the destruction is, and spend our own tax money for the restoration. These companies have, for decades, been thwarting any attempt on part of the government to evolve alternative sources of energy.

The notorious methane project which has raised so many eyebrows, should also be seen as part of the inexorable Liberalisation Machine which has destroyed and displaced millions of livelihoods in various states like Chattisgarh, Jharkand etc feeding itself on our underlying natural resources like bauxite, natural gas, coal etc. Almost all state governments have been instructed to help and co-operate with the big industrial giants in their acquisition of our natural resources so that the exploitation of the natives of the land goes unchecked. If the names are Reliance, Vedanta, Adani in the North, the methane company in the South has some other name.

With regard to the institutionalised corruption in the state government departments in TN, it is essential to view it as a systemic failure of the ‘tender’ system rather than as an issue specific to our own beloved state. The recent bridge collapse in Kolkata triggered by clandestine IVRCL- Trinamool dealings stand testimony to my assertion.

All issues mentioned above, as enunciated, are not specific to Tamil Nadu alone but very much part of an national/international phenomenon. No single political party in Tamil Nadu has allowed our political discourse to veer beyond our regional limits. These parties especially Dravidian ones have kept shifting the blame for all the ruin to each other without even hinting to our masses, a minor idea of how to permanently clean up this mess. Having said that, it is worth noting that neither the ADMK nor the DMK have voiced their concerns on various national issues which are in turn, central to our own problems, unless these parties had had national ambitions at various points of time.

During the years of freedom struggle, in many sessions of the Indian National Congress, during his presidential addresses, Nehru stressed the importance of locating the Indian freedom struggle on the wide map of the international movement of the enslaved nations against European Colonialism rather than confining our view-finder only to our local problems. Nehru recognised the fact that no local issue is essentially 'local' and no sudden phenomenon is really 'sudden'. Any social or political event however distinct and abrupt they may appear, cannot happen outside the boundaries of space and time. Each event of importance occurring in a particular region, will definitely have its seeds sown either long back or recently in time, and would be either a repetition of an event that occurred somewhere else or part of a parallel phenomenon sweeping the other parts of the world simultaneously. 

Hence the Alternative Politics that I propose in Tamil Nadu must introduce national and international events into its language and discourse, thereby informing and educating people to look for solutions applied elsewhere in the world to their own local problems, effectively eliminating the space for tunnel visioned ethnic, linguistic or other nationalisms.

PWF- The hope?

It is worth mentioning that it was the Left parties in Tamil Nadu who conceived the idea of the PWF, bringing subsequently Vaiko and Tirumavalavan into their fold. They barely drew public attention since these parties were seen as rejects from the long running DMK-ADMK machinery. An unprecedented factor that favoured the non Dravidian parties this time, was that the anti incumbency in TN had not completely translated into complete sympathy for the opposition. Hence the DMDK wielded substantial political power, being increasingly seen as the game changer around whom the fortunes of both the ADMK and the DMK revolved. The delay in the decision to align with any of the popular fronts in Tamil Nadu inflated the hype and attention around the 10 year old party. When, to everyone's surprise, it sealed its deal with the lesser known PWF, the spotlight that followed the DMDK everywhere fell on the unobtrusive PWF as well. It is from here, that the third alternative really looked like taking off, finally.

Having been conceived by the Left, whose progressive ideas have remained unsold to the general Indian public even after having a near impeccable record of corruption-free governance in three States for quite a long time, I expected that the PWF manifesto would contain the foundations of the Alternative Politics that we are terribly in need of. I was disappointed to learn that there was not much in it to cheer. The addition of the DMDK could have given the PWF more firepower, but in the event of them forming a government, the ideologically impoverished party does not hold out much hope.

Let me remind my readers that the UPA-1 which forced the Congress to rely more on its alliance partners did not hike petrol prices a lot of times or trigger so much inflation as it did in its next, relatively independent tenure. The first NDA government led by Vajpayee also had to depend on many other parties for its survival and hence nobody from the central government asked people like me to leave for Pakistan as they do now. Let me reassure you that I am not digressing, as much as I am reminding you of the benefits a coalition government can give compared with that of a single party government. We would not have had an 'Emergency' in 1975 had we voted for a coalition government. So in that way and possibly the only way, the PWF springs hopes for the first coalition government in Tamil Nadu. Let us not forget the fact that no political party has so much innate goodness that, on the event of its assuming the highest power single-handedly without having to share it with other partners, they will spare no effort to render service after service to its hopeful citizenry. In an atmosphere where a winning candidate could not have spent less than 28 lakh for his campaign, a single party government would entrust unhindered power in its hands enabling it, not only to recover the heavy investment but also fatten itself on public money and resources. A coalition in that sense, would at least to some extent, squelch its feeding frenzy.

P.S: All my above arguments are for those who believe in voting and would not miss an opportunity to exercise their so called 'right' and 'power'. I have been called many times by my friends as being 'unpatriotic' and 'traitorous' for abstaining from voting in all the elections. But I always had a far less guilty conscience than theirs. I at least did not play a role in bringing their two DMKs into power as they did.

P.P.S: I am not voting this time as well.

ஜே.என்.யு, நாட்டுப்பற்று, சில கேள்விகள்

ஜே.என்.யு வளாகத்தில் அனுமதி மறுக்கப்பட்ட ஒரு கூட்டம் நடைபெறுகிறது. கூட்டம் அப்சல் குருவின் தூக்கு தண்டனை குறித்த கேள்விகளை எழுப்பும் நோக்கில் நடைபெறவிருந்தது. அந்த கூட்டத்திள் இருந்த சிலர் 'இந்தியா ஒழிக' என்று காஷ்மீர் விடுதலைக்கு ஆதரவான கோஷங்களை எழுப்பியதால், தகவல் அறிந்த காவல் துறையினர் அம்மாணவர்கள் மேல் தேசதுரோக சட்டத்தின் கீழ் வழக்குகள் போட்டு, அவர்களை கைது செய்கின்றனர். மாணவர் சங்கத்தலைவர்  கண்ணையா குமார் மீதும் அதே சட்டத்தின் கீழ் வழக்கு போடப்படுகிறது. அடுத்த நாள் மத்திய உள் துறை அமைச்சர் ராஜ்நாத் சிங் அம்மாணவர்களுக்கு தீவிரவாதிகளுடன் தொடர்பு இருப்பதாக பகீரங்கமாக அறிவிக்கிறார். பின்னர் நீதிமன்ற வளாகத்தில் அம்மாணவர்கள் மீதும், மாணவர்களுக்கு ஆதரவு கரம் நீட்டிய இடதுசாரி தலைவர்கள் மீதும் போலீஸின் முன்னிலையிலையே சில பாஜக தொண்டர்களால் வன்முறை கட்டவிழ்க்கப்படுகிறது. சில நாட்களில் ஒரு வக்கீல், கண்ணையா குமாரை போலீஸ் உதைத்ததில் அவர் சிறுநீர் கழித்ததை தான் கண்டு களித்ததாக ஒரு வீடியோவில் பெருமை உடன் ஒப்புகொள்கிறார். பாஜக கட்சியினர் அரசாங்கத்தின் நடவடிக்கை நாட்டு நலன் அடிப்படையில் சரி என்றும் இது போன்ற தேசவிரோதிகள் சுட்டு தள்ளப்படவேண்டும் என்றும் குறிப்பிடுகின்றனர். தமிழ்நாட்டில் இந்த பிரச்னை குறித்து பெரிதாக ஞானம் இல்லாதவர்களில் சிலர் 'தேசவிரோத மாணவர்களை' அரசாங்கம் ஏன் தங்கள் வரிபணத்தை செலவு செய்து படிக்கவைக்க வேண்டும் என்றும், அப்பல்கலைக்கழகத்தை மூடவேண்டும் என்றும் தங்கள் கருத்துகளை முன்வைக்கின்றனர். தேசத்தின் பாதுகாப்புக்கு மேல் எது உயரியது என்றும், மாணவர்களுக்கு எதுக்கு அரசியல் என்றும் பல கேள்விகள் முன்வைக்கப்படுகின்றன.

AFSPA :
1990இல் காஷ்மீரில் AFSPA  என்னும் சட்டம் கொண்டுவரப்பட்டது. இந்திய பாதுகாப்பு படையினர்களுக்கு, குறைந்தபட்ச சந்தேகத்தின் அடிப்படையிலேயே  யாரைவேண்டுமானாலும் கைது செய்யவும், எங்கு வேண்டுமானாலும் சோதனை நடத்தவும், தேவைப்படும்போது யாரைவேண்டுமானாலும் போதிய எச்சரிக்கைகளுக்கு பிறகு சுட்டுத்தள்ளவும் அந்த சட்டம் அதிகாரம் அளித்தது. வடகிழக்கு மாநிலங்களில் தேசபாதுகாப்பின் பேரில் முதன்முதலில் 1958ஆம் ஆண்டு இயற்றப்பட்டு, மணிப்புரிலும் நாகலாந்திலும் பல மனித உரிமை மீறல் புகார்கள்  அச்சட்டத்தின் மீது எழுந்தும், அது 32 வருடங்களுக்கு பிறகு காஷ்மீருக்கும் நீட்டிக்கபடுகிறது.

சட்டம் அமலான ஒரே வருடத்திற்குள் காஷ்மீர் குப்வாரா மாவட்டத்தில்  ஒரு சோதனையின் பேரில் ஒரு கிராமத்தின் 100 பெண்கள் ராணுவ படைவீரர்களால் கற்பழிக்கப்பட்டனர். 1993இல் ஆனந்தனாகில் அமைதியாக நடந்த ஒரு எதிர்ப்பு கூட்டத்தில் எல்லை பாதுகாப்பு படையினர் போதிய காரணம் இல்லாமலேயே துப்பாக்கி சூடு நடத்தி அப்பாவி மக்களில் 35 பேர் கொன்றனர். 2008இல் காஷ்மீரில் பந்திபோரா, பாரமுல்லாஹ், குப்வாரா என்னும் ஊர்களில் Mass Graves என அழைக்கப்படும் கூட்டு மயானக்குழிகள் கண்டுபிடிக்கப்பட்டன. அம்மயானங்களில் 3000 உடல்கள் தோண்டி எடுக்கபடுகின்றன. அதில் சுமார் 500 உடல்கள் காஷ்மீரில் வாழும் உள்ளூர் அப்பாவி மக்களுடையது என்னும் தகவல் வெளியானது, AFSPA அமலுக்கு பிறகு நடந்த நமது ராணுவம் நடத்திய பல மனித உரிமை மீறல் சம்பவங்களில் மிக சிலவற்றை மட்டுமே நான் இங்கு குறிப்பிட்டு  இருக்கின்றேன்.

தேசியம் :
வரலாறு தொடங்கிய காலம் முதல் இந்தியா என்னும் சொல் ஒரு பெரிய துணைக்கண்டத்தையோ அல்லது கிழக்கே ஒரு பெரும் நிலபரப்பை குறிப்பதற்கு மட்டுமே பயன்பட்டு வந்தது, அசோகர், அக்பர் என பல சக்திவாய்ந்த மன்னர்களின் காலத்தில் கூட இந்தியா என்பது ஒரு சாம்ராஜ்யம் எனதான் அழைக்கப்பட்டது. சாம்ராஜ்யமும் நாடும் ஒரே பொருள் தருபவை அல்ல, சாம்ராஜ்யம் என்பது பல நாடுகளின் தொகுப்பு. இவ்வளவு ஏன் தமிழகத்தையே சேர, சோழ, பாண்டிய நாடுகள் என மூன்றாகத்தான் பிரித்து நம் வரலாற்று நூல்கள் குறிப்பிடுகின்றன. வெள்ளையர்கள் இந்தியா என்னும் சாம்ராஜ்யத்தை முழுமையாக தங்கள் ஆதிக்கத்தின் கீழ் கொண்டு வந்து ஏறக்குறைய ஒரு நூற்றாண்டுக்கு பிறகு தான் இந்திய சுதந்திர போராட்டம் துளிர் விட தொடங்கியது. உலகம் முழுவதையும் தன் காலடியில் கொண்டுவந்த ஒரு பெரும் வல்லரசை எதிர்கொள்ள துண்டு துண்டாக சிதறிகிடக்கும் ஒற்றுமையற்ற தேசங்கள் போதாது என்ற அறிவும், காலனி ஆதிக்க சுரண்டல் கூறுகளை முழுமையாக புரிந்த கொண்ட, சாதி மத மொழி பேதங்கள் கடந்த ஒரு பரந்துபட்ட மக்கள் படையே நமக்கு விடுதலை பெற்றுத்தரவல்லது என்ற சரியான புரிதலும் நம் சுதந்திர போராட்ட தலைவர்களுக்கு இருந்தது. 'தேசியம்' என்னும் சொல், அதுவரை தங்களுக்குள் சண்டையிட்டு கொண்டிருந்த சின்னஞ்சிறு நாடுகளை, 'சுரண்டல்' என்ற ஒரு பொது பிரச்னையை களையும் பொருட்டு,  ஒன்றிணைக்க நம் தலைவர்களால் முதன்முதலில் பயன்படுத்தப்பட்டது. நேருவும் காந்தியும் வெள்ளையன் மேல் வெறுப்பு கொள்ளவோ, வெறுப்பு அரசியலை தேசியம் என்னும் பெயரில் மக்கள் மேல் திணிக்கவோ முற்படவில்லை. வெள்ளையனின் சுரண்டல் அரசியலைத்தான் குறிவைத்தார்கள். கிட்டத்தட்ட முக்கால் நூற்றாண்டிற்குள் இந்தியாவுக்கு வெள்ளையனிடம் இருந்து சுதந்திரமும் பெற்று தர இந்தியாவை வழிநடத்தினார்கள்.

நேரு ஆட்சிக்கு வந்தபிறகு பல சிற்றசர்கள், நவாப்கள் என பலருடன் பேச்சுவார்த்தை நடத்தி, இந்தியா என்னும் புதிய நாட்டுடன் எல்லா தனி நாட்டு மக்களுக்கும்  இணைய விருப்பம் உள்ளனவா என்பதை உறுதி செய்த பிறகே, இந்தியா முதன்முதலில் ஒரு தனிப்பெரும் நாடாகவும், 1950இல் ஒரு குடியரசாகவும் அறிவிக்கப்பட்டது. 1952இல் நடந்த ஒரு பாராளுமன்ற உரையில் காஷ்மீரின் எதிர்காலத்தை காஷ்மீர் மக்களே தீர்மானிக்கட்டும் என்றும், அவர்கள் நம்முடன் இணையவில்லை என்றால் அதை வலியுடன் நாம் ஏற்றுகொள்ள வேண்டும் என்றும், மக்கள் விருப்பதை மீறி பலவந்தமாக யாரையும் நம்வசம் வைத்துக்கொள்ளவேண்டாம் என்றும் நேரு, காஷ்மீர் மக்களுக்கு உறுதி அளித்தார். தேசியம் என்னும் சொல் அன்பின் அடிப்படையில், விருப்பத்தின் வழி மட்டுமே முழுமையான அர்த்தம் பெரும் என்ற புரிதலுடன் பேசப்பட்ட வார்த்தைகள் அவை.

ஜே.என்.யு:
ஜே.என்.யு பல்கலைக்கழகம் காலம் காலமாக இடதுசாரி சிந்தனைகளின் வளர்ப்பிடமாகவும், பல துறைகளில் பெரும் அறிவுஜீவிகளை உருவாக்கும் சிறந்த அறிவுத்தொழிற்சாலையாகவும் , பல தரபட்ட மாணவர்கள் உணர்வுகளாலும், கருத்துக்களாலும் சங்கமிக்கும் சிந்தனைசமுத்திரமாகவும் விளங்குவதை அந்த பல்கலைகழகத்தை பற்றி நன்கு அறிந்தவர்கள் ஒப்புகொள்கிறார்கள். எந்த ஒரு வெறுப்புணர்வும் இல்லாமல், வெவ்வேறு சித்தாந்தங்கள் மீது நம்பிக்கை கொண்டிருக்கும் மாணவர்களை, ஒருவருக்கு ஒருவர் ஆரோக்யமான விவாதங்களில் ஈடுபடசெய்யும் அந்த பல்கலைகழக சூழல் இந்தியா என்னும் ஒரு பரந்துபட்ட ஜனநாயகத்திற்கு சிறந்ததோர் முன்னோடியாக விளங்குவதை நான் கேள்விப்பட்டு இருக்கிறேன். மாட்டிறைச்சி உண்பதற்கு ஆதரவு தெரிவிப்பவர்களை பாகிஸ்தானுக்கு அனுப்ப ஆசைப்படும் அரசாங்கம் மத்தியில் இருக்கும்போது, ஜே.என்.யு போன்ற பல்கலைகழகத்தை இத்தனை நாட்கள் எப்படி விட்டுவைத்தார்கள் என்றே எனக்கு இன்னும் விளங்கவில்லை.

அப்சல் குருவை தூக்கிலிட, முறையற்ற விசாரணையும், நம்பகமற்ற ஆதாரங்களும், இஸ்லாமிய தீவிரவாதத்தின் மேல் அரசாங்கத்துக்கு இருக்கும் குருட்டு தனமான வெறுப்புணர்வும், அதன் விளைவாய் உறுதிசெய்யபடும் வாக்குவங்கியுமே காரணங்களாய் அமைந்ததென பல மனித உரிமை அமைப்புகள் அடித்துசொல்கின்றன. அவர்களுடைய கூற்றை நாம் முழுமையாக ஏற்கவேண்டிய அவசியம் இல்லை. நம் காவல் துறையும், நீதித்துறையும் அரசாங்கத்தின் கைப்பாவைகளாக வேலை செய்கிறார்களோ என்ற சந்தேகம் நமது வாழ்வில் ஒரு நொடி கூட நமக்கு வந்ததில்லையா என்ன ? அப்படி சந்தேகிக்கும் ஒருவர் நம்மிடம் தன சந்தேகத்தை முன்வைக்கும்போது அவரை நாம்  தேசதுரோகி என அழைத்தால் அது சரியான நிலைப்பாடாகுமா ?

'மற்ற பிரச்னைகளுக்கு நீங்கள் சொல்வது சரி. ஆனால் இது தீவிரவாதம் சம்பந்தப்பட்ட பிரச்னை அல்லவா? காஷ்மீர் பிரிவினைவாதத்திற்கு ஆதரவு தெரிவிப்பது தேசதுரோகம் தானே ?' என நீங்கள் எதிர்கருத்து கூறலாம். ஒருவர் அப்சல் குரு தூக்கிலிடப்பட்டதை கேள்விக்குட்படுத்தினால் அவர் காஷ்மீர் பிரிவினைவாதத்தை ஆதரிப்பவர் என ஆகிவிடுமா ? கண்ணையா குமார் என்னும் மாணவர் தலைவர், அப்சல் குரு வழக்கை பற்றி விவாதிக்க போடப்பட்ட ஒரு கூட்டத்தை தலைமை தாங்கினால் அவர் காஷ்மீர் பிரிவினைவாதி ஆகிவிடுவாரா? கண்ணையா குமார் இந்தியாவுக்கு எதிராக பேசியதாக சொல்லப்படும் காணொளி ஆதாரம் நீதிமன்றத்தில் இன்று வரை அரசாங்கத்தால் சமர்பிக்கப்படவில்லை. ஆதாரமில்லாமல் கைது செய்யப்படும் கண்ணையா சட்டவிரோதமாக போலிசாரால் அடித்து நொறுக்கபடுகிறார். கைது நடந்த மறுநாளே எந்த ஆதாரமும் இல்லாமல் அம்மாணவர்கள் லஷ்கர் போன்ற தீவிரவாத கும்பலைச் சேர்ந்தவர்கள் என உள் துறை அமைச்சர் அறிவிக்கிறார்.

இம்மாணவர்களின் கோஷங்கள் இந்தியாவையும், காஷ்மீரில் இரவு பகல் பாராமல் எல்லையை காத்து நிற்கும் நம் ராணுவ வீரர்களையும் அவமதிக்கின்றன என பலர் சொல்கிறார்கள். AFSPA சட்டத்தின் கீழ் நமது வீரர்கள் அப்பாவி மக்கள் மேல் நிகழ்த்திய கொடுமைகளை வைத்து அவர்களுடைய தியாகங்கள் அனைத்துமே கட்டுக்கதை என்று உங்களை நான் நம்பச் சொல்லவில்லை. 'இந்தியா ஒழிக' என கோஷிப்பவர்களை குருட்டுத்தனமாக தீவிரவாதிகள் என முத்திரை குத்தாமல் அவர்கள் ஏன் அப்படி செய்தார்கள் எனத் தெரிந்துகொள்ளும் திறந்த மனநிலையை நாம் ஏற்படுத்திக்கொள்ள வேண்டும் என்பதையே கோடிட்டு காட்ட விழைகிறேன்.

அப்படி கோஷித்தவர்கள் AFSPA -வினால் பாதிக்கப்பட்டவர்களாக இருக்கலாம். அவர்களை பேச்சுவார்த்தைக்கு அழைத்து ஆவன செய்ய அரசாங்கம் முன்வர வேண்டும். அவர்களில் ஒருவர் AFSPA -வினால் பாதிக்கப்படாதவர் எனில், அவர் உண்மையிலேயே காஷ்மீர் பிரிவினைவாதத்தை நம்புபவர் எனில், அவருடைய கருத்துக்களையும் அரசாங்கம் கேட்டுத்தெரிந்து கொண்டு தங்கள் நிலைபாட்டையும், அந்நிலைப்பாட்டின் நியாயங்களையும் விவாதம் மூலம் புரியவைக்க வேண்டும். ஒரு அரசாங்கம் ஆனது, தனக்கு ஒவ்வாத அல்லது எதிரான  கருத்தை ஒருவர் வன்முறையை விடுத்து அற வழியில் முன்வைக்கும்போது, அவரை தன் வசம் இருக்கும் பலத்தை வைத்து அடக்க நினைப்பது சரி தானா என சிந்திக்கவேண்டும். ஒரு இடது சாரி கட்சி ஆட்சியில் இருக்கும்போது இந்துத்துவ அமைப்புகள் கோட்சேவுக்கு சிலை வைத்து, காந்திக்கு எதிரான கருத்துக்களை பேசினால் அவர்களை தேசதுரோகிகள் என கைது செய்து அவர்கள்மேல் வன்முறையை கட்டவிழ்ப்பதும் தவறு தான். எந்தவித கொள்கையின் நியாயங்களும் அறவழியில் முன்வைக்கப்படும்போது அவற்றுக்கு அறவழியில் பதிலளிப்பதே ஒரு நாகரிகமான ஜனநாயகத்திற்கு அழகு.

தேசவிரோதிகள் என்ற சொல்லைப் பயன்படுத்தும் நமது அரசாங்கம் 'எங்கள் அமைச்சர்களே நாட்டுப்பற்று கொண்டவர்கள்' என மார்தட்டி கொள்ளும்போது 'தேசியம்',' நாட்டுப்பற்று' போன்ற வார்த்தைகள் காலத்தின் போக்கில் அர்த்த மாற்றங்கள் அடைந்திருப்பதாக நான் உணர்கிறேன். தேசியம் என்னும் சொல், சுதந்திர போராட்ட காலகட்டத்தில் அன்பின் அடிப்படையில் நமது தலைவர்கள், நமக்குள் ஒற்றுமையைப் பேண பயன்படுத்தியதாகும். இன்று பாஜக அரசு நம்மிடம் விற்க நினைக்கும் தேசியம் பாகிஸ்தான் மேலும், ஒட்டு மொத்த இஸ்லாமிய சமுதாயத்தின் மேலும் நம்மிடை இல்லாத வெறுப்புணர்வை அடிப்படையாக கொண்டு உருவாக்கபட்டதுபோல தோன்றுகிறது.

'அப்துல் கலாம் முஸ்லிமாக இருந்தாலும், தேசியவாதியாகவும், மனிதநேயராகவும் வாழ்ந்தார்' என பாஜக அமைச்சர் ஒருவர் ஏற்கனவே குறிப்பிட்டிருக்கிறார். இந்தியா பாகிஸ்தான் கிரிக்கெட் போட்டிகளின் போது நமக்கு இயல்பாக ஏற்படும் பாகிஸ்தானிய வெறுப்பு இந்த 'புதிய தேசியத்துக்கு' கை கொடுக்கும். 'நாங்கள் பீகாரில் தோல்வி உற்றால் பாகிஸ்தானில் பட்டாசு வெடித்து கொண்டாடுவார்கள்' என்றார் அமித் ஷா. பாகிஸ்தானில் தீவிரவாதிகள் இருப்பதனால் பாகிஸ்தானையே வெறுக்கும் போக்கைத்தான் இந்த 'புதிய தேசியம்' நமக்கு கற்பிக்கிறது. அப்படி ஒரு தேசியம் நமக்கு தேவையே இல்லை.

வெள்ளையனை விரட்டிய பின்பும் தேசியத்தின் பயன் என்ன என்பதை நான் பல நாட்களாக யோசித்துக்கொண்டு வருகிறேன். விடுதலைக்கு பிறகும் நம் மக்களில் முக்கால்வாசி பேர் வறுமையில் தான் வாழ்கிறார்கள். நமது தேசியம் ஏன் நமக்கு சோறு போடவில்லை ? 'தேசியத்தை வளர்த்தெடுத்து, நாம் பாகிஸ்தானையும் தோற்கடித்து, இந்திய முஸ்லிம்களையும் அடக்கிவிட்டு நின்றால், எல்லா காலி வயிறுகளுக்கும் சோறு கிடைத்துவிடுமா ?' என கேட்டார் அருந்ததி ராய்.

சுதந்திரம் அடைந்த பின்பு, இந்தியா, எகிப்து. சீனா, இந்தோனேசியா என பல விடுதலை அடைந்த சுமார் 50க்கும் மேற்பட்ட நாடுகளை எல்லாம் ஒருங்கிணைத்து NAM (NON ALIGNED MOVEMENT) என்னும் மாபெரும் கூட்டியக்கத்தை நேரு உருவாக்கினார். ஐரோப்பாவிடம் அடிமைப்பட்டிருந்த எல்லா நாடுகளும் ஒரே நாடு போல் கைகோர்த்து, தங்கள் முதல் எதிரியான வறுமையை ஒழிக்க வேண்டும் என்னும் உயரிய கொள்கையோடு உருவாக்கபட்டது அந்த கூட்டியக்கம். அம்மாநாடுகளில் யாரும் தேசியம், நாட்டுப்பற்று என பழைய கதைகளையே பேசிக்கொண்டிருக்கவில்லை.

நாடுகள், மாநிலங்கள், நகரங்கள் என இறைவன் நம்மை பிரித்து படைக்கவில்லை. இவ்வுலகத்தில் தற்செயலாக பிறக்கும் ஒவ்வொரு உயிருக்கும் தன் சுற்றத்தை பாதிக்காத வகையில் தன விருப்பம் போல் முழு சுதந்திரத்துடன் வாழ உரிமை உண்டு. மனிதர்கள் உருவாக்கிய அரசாங்கம், நாடு போன்ற செயற்கை சட்டகங்களுக்குள் அவ்வுயிர்கள் தம்மை பொருத்திக்கொள்ள வேண்டிய அவசியமும் இல்லை. இது காஷ்மீருக்கும் பொருந்தும் தமிழகத்துக்கும் பொருந்தும்.

சுரண்டுபவனுக்கு நாடு ஒரு பொருட்டு அல்ல.ஹிட்லர் போலந்து, ஆஸ்திரியா போன்ற வேறு நாட்டுமக்களை மட்டும் கொல்லவில்லை. தன் நாட்டு மக்களான லட்சக்கணக்கான யூதர்களையும் சேர்த்து தான் கொன்று குவித்தார். உலகத்திற்கு தேசியம் என்னும் பாடத்தை பரப்பியவரும் அவர்தான்.

தேசபற்று :
'உங்களுக்கு தேசபற்றே இல்லையா?' என என்னிடம் கேட்காதீர்கள். நான் என் பிழைப்பிற்காக பிரெஞ்சு நிறுவனத்தில் ஒரு நாளைக்கு 11 மணிநேரம் வேலை பார்ப்பவன். கூலியை  மிச்சப்படுத்த என் மலிவான உழைப்பை கடல் கடந்து கவர்ந்து போக வந்திருக்கிறான் பிரெஞ்சுக்காரன். கூலி குடுப்பவனுக்கு இல்லாத தேசபற்று உழைக்கும் எனக்கு எதற்கு ?

Visaranai - Movie Review

Sounds of lathis brushing with bones through layers of flesh; wails and groans piercing the wooden divides in a police station which looks so Indian, so seedy. There is barely a visible effort to tile or smoothen the floors on which the heads lay, with bodies suspended from ceilings. In some ways, the setting looks like a slaughter house with eviscerated carcasses of animals being treated by their indifferent butchers. There is blood, more sound and the butchers here are cops, the custodians of law and order.. Wait wait.. The butchers here are the Ins, ettu and saars. An interrogation is on and all the effort and trouble is not to obtain truth from the accused, if you think so. Instead, all they need is .. a lie.

Visaranai, when I saw the trailers some years ago, caught my attention since it was supposed to be about custodial torture. But I was not waiting for the film badly to catch it as soon as possible because it looked like it dealt with a world which I thought I had nothing to do with. I had read myriads of instances of innocent people being tortured to confess to crimes they had no knowledge about, but these were news items which barely made headlines. I had little care towards them, just like our own newsmen. But when the show was over yesterday and I was walking alone at 10 pm, something inside me shuddered at the sight of a blinking multi-color light dispenser at the top of a white SUV. It was a harmless police vehicle that was supposed to be guarding my streets. The shudder was instinctive and its seeds had probably been sown during a scene from the movie which had a policeman requesting a resident of a middle class neighborhood to quit being curious for their own safety, because a 'police operation' was on. (Watch the movie to learn more about it) All I had realised was that it could happen in my neighborhood and probably it has been happening all these years in my calm and settled vicinity.

I am still talking about the impact the film made on me rather than film making aspects which should have been the fulcrum of any movie review. What I still cannot shake off from me is the feeling that the villains(cops) in the film were not Pandyas of Kaaka kaaka or Vinayaks of Mankathas. Most of them here had pot bellies, weak arms and greying moustaches and receding hairlines. Can police-uncles in my vicinity conceal so much cruelty and heinousness beneath their weak and ordinary profiles?

Vetrimaran uses brute force much like his former colleague Bala to infuse his scenes in the first half with the much needed intensity to make us wince in our seats whenever a blow falls on the knuckles of the protagonist. The empathy hence is easily won, that I wanted to whistle for Dinesh when he walks in front, out of his row to face the menacing inspector who wants to know who gave the idea of fasting as a symbol of resistance. But the 'brute force' employed by the director recedes to the background in the second round 'post- lunch' session with Dinesh standing up each time, after a blow, to save his friends from the brutality of palm - branch torture. Here the craft of Maran takes over and so seamlessly melds with the now second fiddling 'brute force' to create a stirring stanza of cinematic poetry that weaves violence and values into a single fabric.

One of the main reasons why so much goes well in the first half is the contentedness to remain focused on one specific domain. The innocent migrant workers of a town versus the scheming local police. The detailing is precise and rhythm, razor sharp. In the second half, Maran transports the protagonists into a wider canvas where they are meant to be part of a state conspiracy whose scale and repercussions would be historical. It is here the messianic intentions of the director try coming to the forefront as he wishes to deliver a strong, far-reaching, univerally relevant social message. The use of the words 'System' by the local cops looked totally out of place with them and more in sync with Vetrimaran, who was speaking against globalisation in a television interview, a few years ago. The narrative, in the process shifts to the details of the conspiracy and loses its protagonists altogether for sometime. This kind of inconsistency in the writing is made pardonable by how well these scenes are staged. Samuthirakani must be given credit for acing the character that houses a troubled soul inside a benevolent body. He preserves so much of his 'Dayalan' goodness of his Saattai days and tempers it with the angst of 'Kadamai Kanniyam Kattupadu' Satyaraj.

I could not appreciate the humor of the Murugadoss character even if it was for comic relief. It is one thing for the protagonists to have moved on from all the trauma and another to make fun of it, which should surely have needed much more time. But I felt like someone in the sets had reminded the morbid Maran to remind his invested audience that all this was 'just cinema' and not to take it too seriously, just like our neighbor uncle who winked at us children who turned 'wide-eyed' serious at his antics. But the genuine moment of laughter came for me at Murugadoss ordering leg pieces forgetful of his lost teeth. This was a Chaplinesque moment where the audience is supposed to laugh first, then check and think about the tragedy.

These minor issues apart, I could read Maran's intention to have chosen this story among many others, for a film-  for its voice against the overpowering hypocritical State. The State, even in a Democratic setup cannot shed its die hard tendencies to operate as an 'infallible' Patriarch who wields a menacing bludgeon to force its hapless citizens into submission whenever it finds them straying the line of arbitrary righteousness. The climactic sequence of Samuthirakani trying to recover the gun from Dinesh resembles that of a father who is in pursuit of an adamant kid who would not surrender his toy. The State has no languages, no religion and no other tangible bound that would check its intrusive influence. When the Telugu inspector cries 'Tamil aalungala patthi theriaadha' with so much condescension, the audience sent out something like a war cry as a defense for their language. I could see that director smiling with the tongue firmly in the cheek, waiting to unleash his bag of final tricks allowing the audience to wallow in their temporary victory, when the Tamil cop saves the protagonists. When Murugadoss says he loves working in a Tamilnadu police station compared to that belonging to Andhra, the audience cheered but I was bracing myself up. When the reliable Tamil cops turn towards their own 'compatriots' in the climax, the theatre was stunned into silence.

 'Absolute Power corrupts absolutely'.

Vote for Amma instead, if you want to vote for RJ Balaji

When electricity and internet were restored to my house after nearly a week of 'total detachment' from the world, I got the chance to open Facebook. I was surprised and gladdened by so many of my friends whose laudable efforts of volunteering shattered many of my prejudices on them. Even many women were seen active in the flood relief effort and the middle class participation in the Chennai ‘Restoration’ Movement made me revisit many of the myths that shrouded a common man's understanding of them. When one of the lady managers in my office was telling me that she got the approval of her father in-law to travel four kilometers from her house to distribute relief material to the homeless, my hands stretched forward for an involuntary handshake with her.

For how long can the rocks of education, competition, fears of survival, career threats keep the springs of human compassion concealed beneath their smothering heft? All those uneducated brats and uncultured migrant folk of our neighborhood from whom we had warned the ladies of our family to remain guarded against ‘chain-snatching’ or robbery during night time errands to nearby shops, no longer elicited any derision from us. Those many thousands whose encroachments or houses we managed to displace through our 'juggernaut'ish apartment complexes no longer remained on the peripheries of our view-finder. We saw women and children carrying torn mats and overflowing bags, moving out of their water- invaded shanties to some place where no government guided them to. In the absence of electricity and WiFi connectivity, we believed our balconies could relieve us of the bore and our own temporary suffering. But what our balconies showed were nonetheless rare sights that we had seen only in our now defunct televisions- mass human migration. For the internet generation, these unprecedented sights are something to behold and certainly not to be forgotten.

But there was some sights that embarrassed me more. These sights, if you may believe, looked like threatening the hopes that had been built during the last week. The redeeming hopes that every selfish citizen would rise to the occasion on event of an overpowering threat to humanity, began to flicker inside me. Those were nothing but posts in my Facebook Wall that listed 'ministerial' nominations for the next Tamil Nadu elections by some of my Facebook friends. When I saw the names of Sylendra Babu and Arun Krishnamurti, I didn't respond. But when I saw RJ Balaji and Raghava Lawrence and AC Muthiah, I buried my face into my hands.

There is no denying that our present government and the ruling party have been exposed thoroughly in the wake of the calamity. And we thankfully have not still forgotten the misdeeds of the past government. We need an alternative. This is one of the lessons which the floods have taught us. But it is only 'one' of the many lessons.

We must be aware by this time that the floods were not only due to unprecedented rainfall and preparatory weaknesses, but more crucially unplanned urbanisation. What lies at the root of unplanned urbanization are three factors- the advent of multinational (both Indian and foreign) businesses to the city to exploit cheap labour power, the rise of engineering colleges that serve as assembly lines to supply finished human products as raw materials to the former, the rise of big corporate businesses again to exploit the newly created consumer market. Do I sound like a reactionary when I indict these catalysts of development and progress with ‘charges of engineering a man-made disaster’? When progress is misunderstood, reaction becomes noble.

Let me clarify that I am neither a Hindutva right winger who knows nothing more than blind opposition to westernization nor a disillusioned outcast like 'Katradhu Tamil' Prabhakar who would torment a well-dressed call centre employee crossing my street. Let us not forget that these new 'agents' of development did not join Jawaharlal Nehru when he called for private sector participation in national development on the eve of Independence. These agents waited till India took nearly four decades to stand on its own tender feet, and pounced on it as soon as it started to make baby steps. These agents held the government at knife point to stall public sector recruitment, remove all restrictions to start business, choke agriculture so that they can use displaced farmers for their cheap employment from the 1990s. All these were parts of the government’s move so famously called LPG- Liberalisation, Privatisation and Globalization.

All governments right from that headed by Narasimha Rao, had instructed state governments to create a business friendly climate in their own states. How friendly is a climate if it wants businesses to study and conduct environment impact assessments on its site, ensure that no part of the neighborhood and the city is affected due to the upcoming industry and proceed only after societal consensus? How friendly is a climate if the lands for the industrial acquisition are owned by traditional agricultural communities who would move only if they are purchased at market rates? How friendly is a climate if cheap lands for business are camouflaged by forests, marshes and natural catchment?

All state governments took cue from the centre, and not without kickbacks from the business, became agents for private business. They acquired agricultural land through force or money, cleared forests and lakes and threw all environmental assessments to the winds to bring about ‘development’. If you may not be aware, there are thousands of cases pending in Indian courts of law for more than a decade that speak of gross environmental neglect by the state - business conglomerate. The Amendment to Land Bill brought by Narendra Modi government was defeated in the Parliament mainly on grounds of massive environmental destruction that it sought to legalise under the name of ‘development’.

Hence, one thing becomes clear. The floods and the massive destruction to life and property due to unrestricted urbanization all seem to be part of a much bigger plan. If some of you might ask am I wholly against urban development solely on account of some unforeseen natural disaster that happens once in a decade, my answer shall be no. If you need clearer answers from me, I want you people to recall one of our university papers that we studied with a unanimous indifference- Environmental Engineering. You may remember the term –‘Sustainable Development’.

"Sustainable Development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”

This is a rough textbook definition of the term but there is more to it to be understood, if you find yourself in favour of it. First of all, sustainable development can be achieved only by means of planning. Planning will achieve its purpose only if there is an active role of the state. This in turn will entail the state relinquishing its role of serving as a ‘agent’ for the business community and assuming the role of an arbiter, one that shall try to reconcile the material needs of the society with the supply side of it, simultaneously harmonizing such development initiatives with the well-being of the environment. In simple words, the state must ensure that the society produces strictly only as much as it needs and not more than that. This kind of planning, by nature will impose barriers on unhindered industrial expansion and environmental exploitation. This was what Nehru envisioned as a ‘Planned Economy’ but it failed due to the apathy of its implementers. But here is the catch. No business community shall favour sustainable development since the concept of ‘Planned Economy’ is anathema to their motives of unrestricted profiteering. “If the state decides what and how much is needed by its people, what are we to do? How can we expand? How can we profit?”

’Development’ and ‘Sustainability’ are reconcilable. But Globalization and ‘Environment’ are not. No political party in India has steadfastly opposed globalization ever since the movement started. Some of you might say that this is why we proposed RJ Balaji and other non political luminaries to head the government. Let me tell you that the virtues of honesty and charity alone do not suffice for a political career. Politics needs knowledge. Knowledge does not mean mere expertise in a particular domain such as what Arun Krishnamurti possesses in environmental welfare. A profound knowledge of India’s history and political economy is what I mean by knowledge for a political aspirant. It was India's most qualified Prime Minister assumed to have an unquestionable personal record who headed the most corrupt government India ever had a couple of years ago. It was an ‘honest’ and harmless scientist with no political perspective who designed Gas chambers for instant extermination of millions of Jews in Hitler’s Germany. If a scientist himself needs such an informed political outlook, what about a responsible people’s representative?

To conclude, let me tell you that there are no quickfixes like RJ Balaji for the problems our society faces right now. To make good politicians, we need not only good citizens. As Silambarasan says in VTV, ‘fortune favours the intelligent’. We, as a democratic society, must exercise our one week-old ‘compassion’ glands towards caring for the society not just through making donations and offering relief material. Following politics, understanding history, making informed debate is crucial for good democratic health. If we are not willing to take all this trouble, you can serve best by abstaining from voting. Still if you want to vote, you can vote for ‘Amma’ again rather than voting for RJ Balaji. There would not be much difference in the long run.

-JEEVA P

The Curious Case of Kamal Haasan

Every time I try to promote Kamal Haasan and sell his legacy to my friends, he gets the signals from somewhere and immediately disowns his deal with me. You must be knowing how embarrassing it must be for a fan who wants to graduate into becoming his disciple forever. It is tantamount to the helpless frustration that Woody Allen faces in Crimes and Misdemeanors when his 'guru' who alone he believed knew the much guarded, occult paths to 'happiness', suddenly commits suicide on account of 'overpowering emptiness' of life.

In Anbe Sivam, Kamal derided an ad film-maker calling him nothing more than a dog that waits on its feet to catch the bone that multi national companies throw at him. Was the insult rendered hastily like a hot headed, intolerant anti-corporate activist who bashes rich people amidst huge crowds so as to win applause and support? If that was the case, we would have forgotten the film. Kamal's case against the rapacious corporate class was irrefutably solid and thoroughly inspiring. Whenever I used to debate with my friends on the evils of corporate hegemony over public resources, I could easily quote from the quintessential Anbe Sivam. Even if my foundations as a left winger were shaken by someone, I would choose to remain 'ideologically unaltered' because Kamal had vindicated my views in Anbe Sivam. Nearly twelve years after the movie's release, when I look at a Kamal cupping his palms to utter 'Abhimaanam' in the Pothys commercial, I check my admiring eyes that drool at his vintage charm, and cover my face with embarrassment at the realisation of how effortlessly he breaks my image of him. Kamal sympathizers may rush to the defence of him stating that it was Nallasivam who spoke those words and not the genius himself. Guys please be honest.Part of our fascination for Kamal comes from the fact that he loves talking himself through his characters and his movies are really 'his' movies. When Govind says 'Kadavul iruntha nalla irukum' to Asin in Dasavatharam, we whistled in theatres only because we realised that, Govind for a split second had assumed the personality of Kamal, the writer, the rebel. To put it more simply, we are all in awe of Kamal's bravura to bring forth contentious views into the conformist pop culture of Tamil cinema.

Kamal was the first one probably in Indian cinema to delve into the workings of militant Hindu organizations that are holding sway in India right now. If you want to introduce someone to Hindutva and fascism, please invite them for a screening of Hey Ram. Not even a man who was part of Nazi resistance movements of the 1940s or a communist hardliner could have depicted the diabolic logical foundations that drive the fascist mills, better than Kamal. When such a man made a statement requesting the writers and intellectuals to be more tolerant towards 'intolerant' men, it was like being slapped on the face by my own hands.

Frankly, when Hindi parallel film makers were returning their awards in protest against intolerance, I expected an immediate voice of support from Kamal. Imagine how such a gesture from a huge matinee idol would have garnered extraordinary attention and given the movement the requisite momentum. But I can forgive Kamal for it since it is unfair to expect your icon to fulfil your wishes every now and then, because he has done it a few times. As my friend Arulmozhivarman said, even if Kamal is not worried about the common man's worsening state of affairs, he could have risen to the occasion to guard his brethren when they are protesting in FTII against the government. 

I read Kamal's statement that we have always been an intolerant society and things haven't worsened during BJP's rule. I don't know whether he realises that the intolerance lurking inside the society's consciousness for quite so long is consistently being kindled by none other than the State itself and more explicitly than ever before. And anyone who raises a finger against Modi is branded by the government as being anti national or a Pakistani. I recently read reports of a documentary film maker who lives in hiding ever since BJP came to power. According to the report, the police had been fabricating false charges on him because his documentaries focus on the pathetic state of Dalit villagers and their difficulties. The funds of NGOs that support the movements of tribals and poor against corporate invasion have been frozen and one such organization has been accused on charges of sedition. If this is not intolerance, what is it?

I could have forgiven Kamal had he wished not to comment on these happenings and entangle himself in a controversy in an environment that is waiting to pounce on his failings. But he decided to take a stand and he shocked me by defending his own ideological enemies. May be he doesn't want people to rally around him. He doesn't want to have fans as he said before. He may be afraid he would be idolised someday. We make Gods out of mortals and he is probably aware of it. He doesn't believe in God and doesn't want to be one. And this is how we console ourselves by finding excuses to remain loyal to our icons. And this is how we remain fans and fools, perhaps.

-Jeeva P